Robertson v. Woods
| Decision Date | 10 June 1924 |
| Docket Number | 24090 |
| Citation | 263 S.W. 135 |
| Parties | ROBERTSON v. WOODS et al |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Hostetter & Haley, of Bowling Green, for appellant.
Ras Pearson, of Louisiana, Mo., for respondents.
Appeal from the circuit court of Pike county. Suit in equity for decree for title and conveyance of lot 7, block 8, in town of Eolia, in said county. The petition alleged that prior to September 6, 1916, one Lydia Jordan was the owner of lots 6 7, 19, 20, 21, and 22 in said block 8, and defendants agreed with plaintiff that, if he would furnish the money, to wit, $ 1,000 to purchase said lots from said Lydia Jordan, title to be taken in the name of defendants, defendants would, upon the conveyance of said lots to them, convey said lot 7 to the plaintiff and repay to plaintiff $ 850 of the $ 1,000 he paid to said Lydia Jordan for all of said lots -- defendants to have the building then on said 7, and remove same from said lot within two years from the date of the purchase of said property from said Lydia Jordan; that his part of said agreement was performed, and that he paid said $ 1,000 purchase money to said Lydia Jordan, and said lots were all conveyed by her to defendants by warranty deed dated September 6, 1916, and duly recorded; that defendants afterwards, in the year 1916, repaid plaintiff $ 850 of said $ 1,000, so paid by him for said lots, but have failed and refused to convey said lot 7 to the plaintiff. Wherefore plaintiff prays for specific performance of said contract and prays that title to said lot 7 be vested in plaintiff and defendants be divested of all title thereto and be required to convey same to plaintiff, and for general relief.
The answer pleaded the general denial, and that the contract sought to be enforced by plaintiff was not in writing, and was therefore void under the statute of frauds.
After hearing the evidence, the learned chancellor found that the evidence did not justify the court in decreeing specific performance, and found that issue against plaintiff. But said court did find 'that the plaintiff furnished and paid the entire purchase price, to wit, $ 1,000 to Lydia M. Jordan' for all said lots, and that she conveyed all of them to defendants by deed dated and recorded as alleged in the petition, and 'that such conveyance was made at the request of plaintiff and because of some agreement between plaintiff and defendants; the court further finds that said defendants held title to said lots in trust for plaintiff on account of plaintiff having paid the full amount of the purchase price of same to the vendor, Lydia M. Jordan'; that defendants repaid all of said purchase price to plaintiff, except $ 150, and, although the court finds the evidence is not 'sufficiently clear to justify' specific performance as prayed or investing title in said lot 7 in plaintiff, yet the court finds plaintiff is entitled to a vendor's lien for the unpaid part of said purchase money, to wit, $ 150, with interest since the suit was instituted, against all of said lots, and that plaintiff have a special execution authorizing the sale of said lots.
Plaintiff testified that in September, 1916, having previously purchased all the lots from Lydia M. Jordan, and having heard that defendants wished to purchase it -- the house -- he had several conversations with defendant Tolliver Woods, and told him he cared for only one lot and that was the south lot, lot 7; that the conversation regarding which lot he should have took place while he was having Mr. Williams write the deed. Williams heard the conversation. Prior to that time he had paid $ 500 to Mrs. Jordan on account of the purchase price, $ 1,000. In that conversation at the bank he told defendant Tolliver Woods that he had paid the $ 500, and that he was to pay $ 500 more. He left Williams writing the deed to lot 7 from defendants to him, and did not know for two years but what they had signed it. He had agreed with Tolliver Woods to let him have all the lots but lot 7, and the question was how much he would charge him or pay him for that lot. He told Woods he would give $ 150 for that lot with the privilege of using it for two years. Woods asked that he might get the front room of the house or building off the lot so he could run his business, and plaintiff was to pay $ 150 in cash, and plaintiff consented to that, and paid him $ 150, or permitted him to pay $ 150, less than the $ 1,000 that plaintiff paid Mrs. Jordan; that he bought all the lots, and paid her $ 500. At that time she made no deed to anybody. Williams wrote the deed from Mrs. Jordan to the defendants, and then they paid him back the $ 500 he had paid Mrs. Jordan. Did not know whether Woods was present at the time the deed was written. Several days afterwards Williams wrote a deed for lot 7 to plaintiff for the defendants to sign when both the witness and defendant Woods were present. Mr. Woods told Williams to write the deed, and at the same time witness gave Williams a check for $ 150 to give to Mr. Woods, and Williams gave Woods the check; that is, charged the account of the witness with $ 150. He got a call to the country and left the bank while the deed to him was being written. He gave his $ 150 check for lot 7. Part of the house on the property was on lot 7, and it was understood that defendant would have the use of the lot and the privilege of removing the house during the period of two years. The rest of the building was on one of the other lots. It was a dwelling house -- one-story frame. The deed from Mrs. Lydia Jordan to defendant was dated September 6, 1916, and he had contracted for the purchase of the lots from her thirty or sixty days before that date. He agreed to let defendants have all of the lots, except lot 7, and defendants agreed to sell him lot 7 for $ 150 if he would give defendants two years to more the house off lot 7 onto the other lots. He paid $ 850 to Mrs. Jordan and $ 150 to Woods. At the expiration of the two years he demanded that defendants make him a deed to lot 7, which they refused to do. Six months before that he had an opportunity to trade said lot for another lot owned by Mr. Hardin, and he went to defendant Tolliver Woods, and asked him what he would give for said lot 7, and he said he would not give over $ 200 for it. But witness refused to take less than $ 250. At that time witness understood that defendant had signed the deed for lot 7 to him.
Cross-examination Mrs. Jordan had her property for sale prior to September 6, 1916. He bought it from her. Mrs. Jordan executed her deed on September 6 was his understanding. Did not know that he was at the bank at the time or went with Mrs. Jordan to the bank. It was understood that Mr. Williams, the cashier of the bank, was to write the deed and he did. He told Williams to write the deed. He thought he wrote the deed from Mrs. Jordan to him, but he did not. He had a call, and left the bank before it was written. He did not know when it was written, and was not present when it was written. Mrs. Jordan came to the bank, and Williams wrote it. Did not see Tolliver Woods that day. He did not know who furnished Williams the information as to how to write the deed. He knew that he did not. He did not know how the deed was written at the time. He thought it was going to be written from Mrs. Jordan to him. At the time the deed was written he had paid Mrs. Jordan $ 500. He got it back from defendant a few days afterwards. He drew a check for $ 150 to Tolliver Woods a few days after Mrs. Jordan's deed was made to defendant. He did not know whether Mrs. Jordan received her $ 1,000 on the day she made the deed to defendants or not. Williams transacted his business for him and signed checks for him when he was absent. He did not instruct Williams any further than to have Mrs. Jordan make her deed to the property. Williams was a party to the whole transaction, and knew he had already paid down on it and was getting the property from Mrs. Jordan. He paid $ 650 out of his pocket, $ 150 to Mr. Woods, and $ 500 to Mrs. Jordan. Williams attended to his affairs and drew checks on his account, and when he came in the bank Mr. Woods had paid back Williams $ 500. Did not know when the deed was delivered to Woods. Had no conversation with defendants about lot 7 after the transaction until about six months afterwards, when he tried to make a trade with Mr. Hardin. Woods tendered him a check after he would not sign the deed to lot 7, and he had brought suit against him, or was about to sue him. He told Woods he did not want to sell him his lot, that he wanted his lot. He never gave the property in to...
To continue reading
Request your trial